9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (3) TMI 40X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment year 1990-91 against an order passed by the Income tax Appellate Tribunal. Income of Rs. 1,29,607 was shown by the assessee/ appellant whereas the Income-tax Officer (for short "the ITO") assessed his income at Rs. 3,37,990. Addition of Rs. 1,75,000 was made treating the credit taken from Shri Sonelal jain as unexplained. An appeal was preferred by the appellant/assessee before t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in was having an agriculture income from 33.24 acres of agricultural land owned by him and as a matter of fact, he had purchased the house property subsequent to the transaction. Thus, addition of Rs. 75,000 by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is bad in law and the finding recorded is perverse. Hence, the aforementioned substantial questions of law arise in the present appeal for its consideratio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was his own transaction and had the assessee required the money of Rs. 75,000 on November 6, 1989, then there was absolutely nothing to return it next very day, i.e., November 7, 1989. Thus, in the circumstances it has been found that the entry was manipulated one and no amount of Rs. 75,000 was advanced. From the statement of Shri Sonelal jain, it is clear that to the question put to him why the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
